Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2017

Clark v. Nichols M. N. P.

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 5, 2017 · Jay, Lewis, Ray

225 So. 3d 416; 2017 WL 3864178; 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12712 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Sehman v. Sehman (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2026)
Anthony Washington, Thelmon Henry Washington, Jr., Thelma S. Washington v. Alfred Washington (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2024)
Victor Hicks v. Florida Department of Corrections, Mark S. Inch (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Jimmie Casen v. Florida Department of Children and Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
John L. Norman v. Florida Dept. of Corrections (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Brooks v. Willis (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Brooks v. Willis (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
C. C. v. Department of Children and Families, The Guardian ad Litem, and Jewish Family Services (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
C. C. v. Dep't of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner has not demonstrated that the trial court has failed to timely consider and rule upon any motion after having that 'matter called up for hearing and disposition. Petitioner has therefore failed to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus relief. See Moore v. Corr. Med. Servs., 817 So.2d 963, 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (“Absent a showing that the trial court has failed to take action on some pending matter he has noticed for hearing, [the petitioner] has failed to establish an entitlement to mandamus relief.”); Smartt v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 771 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We DENY the petition accordingly.

LEWIS, RAY, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.